Just a quick question about protection. I am finalizing set-up of my code and need a few ideas of the safest way to go.

I have a few OWNER DRAWN STATIC BUTTONS With Bitmaps with it own .MSG and HWND different from the rest of the program.
I am wondering what would be the best way to set up code between a .if statements that would make following with any standard debugger MORE DIFFICULT. I know it may be useless but maybe someone has stubble on some ideas in the past a bout this I always thought a debugger could not see what in a button and could not push it... is this true...

Just want to make sure i hav'nt overlooked anything. I try anything to buy more time :)
Thanks again... I have to ask before i continue.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
IDEA 1

.elseif xMsg == WM_RBUTTONDOWN
mov eax, hPartner
.if eax == button_Number1

CALL Do_Proc ; and let it call small PROC like StrLen as it run

.endif
.endif
.if xMsg == WM_RBUTTONUP
mov eax, hPartner
.if eax == button_Number1

.endif
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

IDEA 3

.elseif xMsg == WM_RBUTTONDOWN
mov eax, hPartner
.if eax == button_Number1

PUT ALL OF THE CODE HERE: Posted on 2002-07-12 20:50:18 by cmax
Well without seeing the rest of the code (and I'm taking a wild guess that you don't want to show it ;) ), it's hard to say. What's easy to say is that even if you call several different procs, it may only still come down to one single conditional jump that needs to be changed in order to kill your protection.

What you should do is assemble and link your program and then try to reverse it yourself to see how difficult it is to bypass.

That's my $00.02 anyways.


--will
Posted on 2002-07-12 22:29:21 by Will
Hey Will , If i show it what the since of trying to hide it :) It is really to big to show. It would take a good 100 pages just to run one full routine which is my main block of code that i want to protect. So i just worte it this way...( come to think of it after what you said someone will find a way in anyway because of all the jumps it has to use. Another stupit post by me... dag )

Well anyway another idea is down the tubes for me again. I just do Idea 1 the standard way maybe i can make someone Get Lost in it or piss him off at lease..

Thank Will

"one single conditional jump" Posted on 2002-07-12 23:02:43 by cmax
What you should do is assemble and link your program and then try to reverse it yourself to see how difficult it is to bypass.
That is actually not a bad idea for you, cmax. As you are an assembly programmer, and you have inside knowledge of what the app is doing, you will be in exactly the same position as any l33t cr4acker that tries to crack it. Which means, if it is easy for you, it will be easy for them, and you will have to try a different approach.

It all comes back to this: nothing is uncrackable (hell, XP was cracked before it was even released), so you can be wasting a lot of energy (and possibly introducing bugs) all for nothing. Make your app so good people want to pay you for it, then you will be able to afford to ignore the cracked copies that are floating around.

Oh yeah, another good approach: use conditional compilation to change the authentication method each time you release a version, that way each version requires a new crack.
Posted on 2002-07-13 05:20:35 by sluggy